Toronto Garrison Crossing (was Fort York Pedestrian and Cycle Bridge) | ?m | ?s | City of Toronto | Pedelta

AlvinofDiaspar said:
Thanks for posting. Wasting all this time, money and coming up with lesser trash and plenty more reports. They (i.e. council) should be proud of themselves.
Click to expand...
It does look as though they have dealt with the fatal flaw I pointed out in 2011. The lack of access to the triangle of land between the two sets of railway tracks. They also seem to have dealt with the unnecessarily meandering pathway, which would make some walks unnecessarily long.

I'm not entirely clear from that EA what the new design is though.
 
nfitz said:
It does look as though they have dealt with the fatal flaw I pointed out in 2011. The lack of access to the triangle of land between the two sets of railway tracks. They also seem to have dealt with the unnecessarily meandering pathway, which would make some walks unnecessarily long.

I'm not entirely clear from that EA what the new design is though.
Click to expand...

I think it's still in design. from page 54 of the pdf:

The design of the structures will be determined through the Design/Build process. Approval to
permit a Design/Build process was granted by City Council in February 2014
(http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2014.PW28.5). It will be
delivered by Build Toronto through an agreement with the City and will include a
comprehensive communications and consultation strategy. The total cost of project
implementation must respect the project budget, currently at $19.7 M.

What I don't get though is the fact that they went for option A1 which they projected to cost 19.7 M. If they had sensibly looked at the costs and their budget in the first place this bridge would have been built by now. Now they are exploring the most expensive option out of their reduced cost alternatives, which I fear is doing the same mitake all over again. They should have just gone with A4 (the curved trus bridge) that they estimated at 13.5 M. It's clear by the descriptions that the arches are made of expensive materials that they have trouble affording. May as well accept the fact that the arches cannot be afforded (and if they could it would be half-assed; no incline) and build a truss bridge. With the remaining money they could make sure it has nice finishes and good materials and whatnot.
 
Canadian Chocho said:
What I don't get though is the fact that they went for option A1 which they projected to cost 19.7 M. If they had sensibly looked at the costs and their budget in the first place this bridge would have been built by now. Now they are exploring the most expensive option out of their reduced cost alternatives, which I fear is doing the same mitake all over again. They should have just gone with A4 (the curved trus bridge) that they estimated at 13.5 M. It's clear by the descriptions that the arches are made of expensive materials that they have trouble affording. May as well accept the fact that the arches cannot be afforded (and if they could it would be half-assed; no incline) and build a truss bridge. With the remaining money they could make sure it has nice finishes and good materials and whatnot.
Click to expand...

Of course, delays and inflation drove up the price - and now we will be getting a lesser product for the same amount of money (and a few reports gratis).

AoD
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Of course, delays and inflation drove up the price - and now we will be getting a lesser product for the same amount of money (and a few reports gratis).
Click to expand...
If it now actually does the task it should do, and connects the triangle of land between the tracks, it won't be a lesser product. Building the original fundamentally flawed plan would have been an error.

Inflation and population growth has also driven up the city's revenue - that shouldn't be a factor.
 
nfitz said:
If it now actually does the task it should do, and connects the triangle of land between the tracks, it won't be a lesser product. Building the original fundamentally flawed plan would have been an error.

Inflation and population growth has also driven up the city's revenue - that shouldn't be a factor.
Click to expand...

It can't be more flawed that a bridge not built for a decade. Besides, the subsequent update corrected that "flaw" and yet still gone overbudget, and now we are looking a completely new redesign with no guarantees of quality. And if inflation and population growth translates into an increased budget for the project, then it shouldn't - but it isn't.

AoD
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
It can't be more flawed that a bridge not built for a decade. Besides, the subsequent update corrected that "flaw" and yet still gone overbudget, and now we are looking a completely new redesign with no guarantees of quality. And if inflation and population growth translates into an increased budget for the project, then it shouldn't - but it isn't.
Click to expand...
I haven't even seen the new design yet, let alone the costing on it. I'm simply speaking to the basic design parameters.

You might build the best car in the world. But it's not much use, if you forgot to put the door on it. Best do it right, than do it fast.
 
I just think that the curved shape (and obviously the function) is the most important part of the design. Whether it is arched with cables shouldn't be such an issue, you could probably get a rather nice truss bridge that well within the budget.
 
nfitz said:
I haven't even seen the new design yet, let alone the costing on it. I'm simply speaking to the basic design parameters. You might build the best car in the world. But it's not much use, if you forgot to put the door on it. Best do it right, than do it fast.
Click to expand...

You should read the EA - there are quoted engineering costs of the original/revised proposals (and they are going back over and over again precisely because of the budget issue). Basic design paramaters doesn't matter if you have nothing to show for it, and in the meantime, inflation is eating away at your budget such that you can afford even less than before.

Canadian Chocho said:
I just think that the curved shape (and obviously the function) is the most important part of the design. Whether it is arched with cables shouldn't be such an issue, you could probably get a rather nice truss bridge that well within the budget.
Click to expand...

I am not sure if that confidence is well-placed, considering our mixed-record on truss bridges. The ones that are "nice" are exactly the expensive ones (think Calatrava's Peace Bridge in Calgary, Jack Diamond's St. Mike's footbridge). Now if one suffices themselves with something like that awful Puente de Luz at Cityplace, then it's another issue - but it certainly won't compare well to the original proposal.

AoD
 
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar said:
I am not sure if that confidence is well-placed, considering our mixed-record on truss bridges. The ones that are "nice" are exactly the expensive ones (think Calatrava's Peace Bridge in Calgary, Jack Diamond's St. Mike's footbridge). Now if one suffices themselves with something like that awful Puente de Luz at Cityplace, then it's another issue - but it certainly won't compare well to the original proposal.

AoD
Click to expand...

Surely there is some middle ground between the Peace Bridge and Puente de Luz. Hell, Puente de Luz would not have been half bad if it was actually straight (has a weird dip from South to North), was a more vibrant yellow, and had that mesh replaced with something less cagey like glass.
 
The 30-day public review period is now complete, and the EA Addendum has now been finalized. Construction is slated to begin this fall, and finish in spring 2017. Here's a more detailed timeline:

Screen shot 2015-01-10 at 11.52.07 PM.png
 

Attachments

  • Screen shot 2015-01-10 at 11.52.07 PM.png
    Screen shot 2015-01-10 at 11.52.07 PM.png
    51.3 KB · Views: 1,223
I'm seriously afraid of attending this or reading any news about it. I get the feeling that they're going to present a cheap truss bridge design and that the DNA design will be watered down. I don't have a good feeling about this.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top